Ideas from 'Conditionals (Stanf)' by Dorothy Edgington [2006], by Theme Structure

[found in 'Stanford Online Encyclopaedia of Philosophy' (ed/tr Stanford University) [plato.stanford.edu ,-]].

Click on the Idea Number for the full details    |     back to texts     |     expand these ideas


4. Formal Logic / B. Propositional Logic PL / 2. Tools of Propositional Logic / c. Derivation rules of PL
Conditional Proof is only valid if we accept the truth-functional reading of 'if'
10. Modality / B. Possibility / 6. Probability
A thing works like formal probability if all the options sum to 100%
Conclusion improbability can't exceed summed premise improbability in valid arguments
10. Modality / B. Possibility / 8. Conditionals / b. Types of conditional
Maybe forward-looking indicatives are best classed with the subjunctives
Simple indicatives about past, present or future do seem to form a single semantic kind
10. Modality / B. Possibility / 8. Conditionals / c. Truth-function conditionals
Inferring conditionals from disjunctions or negated conjunctions gives support to truth-functionalism
The truth-functional view makes conditionals with unlikely antecedents likely to be true
Doctor:'If patient still alive, change dressing'; Nurse:'Either dead patient, or change dressing'; kills patient!
Truth-function problems don't show up in mathematics
10. Modality / B. Possibility / 8. Conditionals / d. Non-truthfunction conditionals
Non-truth-functionalist say 'If A,B' is false if A is T and B is F, but deny that is always true for TT,FT and FF
I say "If you touch that wire you'll get a shock"; you don't touch it. How can that make the conditional true?
10. Modality / B. Possibility / 8. Conditionals / e. Supposition conditionals
On the supposition view, believe if A,B to the extent that A&B is nearly as likely as A
10. Modality / B. Possibility / 8. Conditionals / f. Pragmatics of conditionals
Truth-functionalists support some conditionals which we assert, but should not actually believe
Does 'If A,B' say something different in each context, because of the possibiites there?